4.4 Article

Minimally important differences for Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System pain interference for individuals with back pain

期刊

JOURNAL OF PAIN RESEARCH
卷 9, 期 -, 页码 251-255

出版社

DOVE MEDICAL PRESS LTD
DOI: 10.2147/JPR.S93391

关键词

minimally important differences; pain interference; back pain; Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System; responsiveness; PROMIS

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health (NIH) through the NIH Roadmap for Medical Research [U01AR052171]
  2. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ARTHRITIS AND MUSCULOSKELETAL AND SKIN DISEASES [U01AR052171] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: The minimally important difference (MID) refers to the smallest change that is sufficiently meaningful to carry implications for patients' care. MIDs are necessary to guide the interpretation of scores. This study estimated MID for the Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) pain interference (PI). Methods: Study instruments were administered to 414 people who participated in two studies that included treatment with low back pain (LBP; n=218) or depression (n=196). Participants with LBP received epidural steroid injections and participants with depression received antidepressants, psychotherapy, or both. MIDs were estimated for the changes in LBP. MIDs were included only if a priori criteria were met (ie, sample size >= 10, Spearman correlation >= 0.3 between anchor measures and PROMIS-PI scores, and effect size range =0.2-0.8). The inter-quartile range (IQR) of MID estimates was calculated. Results: The IQR ranged from 3.5 to 5.5 points. The lower bound estimate of the IQR (3.5) was greater than mean of standard error of measurement (SEM) both at time 1 (SEM = 2.3) and at time 2 (SEM = 2.5), indicating that the estimate of MID exceeded measurement error. Conclusion: Based on our results, researchers and clinicians using PROMIS-PI can assume that change of 3.5 to 5.5 points in comparisons of mean PROMIS-PI scores of people with LBP can be considered meaningful.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据